{
  "id": 2926070,
  "name": "Charles Verbitzky, Jr., by Charles Verbitzky, Appellee, v. Daniel H. Cunningham, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Verbitzky v. Cunningham",
  "decision_date": "1917-07-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,060",
  "first_page": "128",
  "last_page": "129",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 128"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 177,
    "char_count": 2198,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "sha256": "dffa88f1eed2f02340dbc586ca2b832e617655a9c248e040f60e551eed58b6b1",
    "simhash": "1:43fee4bde15e2131",
    "word_count": 364
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Charles Verbitzky, Jr., by Charles Verbitzky, Appellee, v. Daniel H. Cunningham, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Egbert J. Folonie, for appellant.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Charles Verbitzky, Jr., by Charles Verbitzky, Appellee, v. Daniel H. Cunningham, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,060.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Shebidan E. Fby, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1917.\nReversed with a finding of fact.\nOpinion filed July 2, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Charles Verbitzky, Jr., a minor, by Charles Verbitzky, his father and next friend, plaintiff, against Daniel H. Cunningham, defendant, to recover damages for personal injuries to plaintiff by negligence. From a judgment for plaintiff for $200, defendant appeals.\nIt appeared that plaintiff, then between two and three years of age, suffered from hernia; that defendant was consulted by plaintiff\u2019s father; that hernia was not easily located in a child of that age and there was some doubt as to which side it was on. It further appeared that the father decided that it was on the left side and directed an operation, which was successfully performed, a hernia being found. Two weeks later the defendant was called again to see the child, who, he was informed, manifested pain, but failed to discover anything. He told the parents to inform him if there was any evidence of hernia on the right side, as he thought that might be the trouble. Three weeks later the father called on defendant and demanded a return of the money paid for the operation on the ground that it had been performed on the wrong side and informed defendant that a lump had appeared on the right side. Defendant offered to operate again without charge, but the father would not agree.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nPhysicians and surgeons, \u00a7 22 \u2014 when evidence insufficient to sustain verdict for plaintiff in action for negligence. In an action against a physician to recover damages for negligence in performing an operation on plaintiff, a minor, for hernia, evidence examined and held insufficient to support a verdict for plaintiff.\nEgbert J. Folonie, for appellant.\nNo appearance for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yola. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0128-01",
  "first_page_order": 154,
  "last_page_order": 155
}